On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 11:24, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Finally, I do believe that even with separate project descriptors, the
> current gump approach can scale - if more people contribute patches to
> projects that they care about and become committers themselves. As this is
> now happening, I was wondering if it was time to revisit
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/gump/faq.html#11
Well I would be happy to help maintain the existing projects and definetly
interested in seeing something like this spread so that the developers using
it.
I think the current gump approach can scale for a while longer. However note
I just chose not to gumpify another project because I knew I would be
maintaining it and couldn't be bothered ;)
However I see another reason for allowing the GUMP descriptors to be stored
in CVS modules. Basically it makes it much easier for users to participate in
the GUMP action. All they have to do is alter their descriptor and viola -
next run they check their results to see if it all works as they expect. This
empowers gumps "clients" a lot more and I think would encourage people to
contribte a little more - but more importantly it would encourage them to
learn about gump more which will lead to more widespread use of it.
If people don't want to maintain their own descriptors then no problem wioth
that either - gump can continue to maintain them. But for the others I think
it woul dbe great.
But if you want to propose this as a top level project I will definetly
support it and definelty help you maintain the project descriptors at least.
--
Cheers,
Pete
-----------------------------------------------------------
If your life passes before your eyes when you die,
does that include the part where your life passes before
your eyes?
-----------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
